December 6, 2012 – Citizen of Mexico receives coram nobis relief and a reduced sentence in assault case

Facts: A citizen of Mexico was arrested at his home and placed in removal proceedings. His immigration attorneys came to the firm for help with their client’s Maryland state court conviction for assault. The citizen of Mexico’s conviction rendered him ineligible for bond and most forms of relief because it was classified as an “aggravated felony” in the immigration context.

The Firm’s Representation: In this case, the firm worked collaboratively with our client’s immigration lawyers. The firm filed a coram nobis based on a violation of our client’s Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel – our client was never informed of the immigration consequences of his plea.

Outcome: On December 6, 2012, the judge granted the coram nobis and granted relief and reduced our client’s sentence for the charge of second degree assault to 364 days. Our client’s conviction could no longer be classified as an “aggravated felony.” As a result, our client can now apply for bond and he can apply for the relief of cancellation of removal.

November 26, 2012 – After four years of litigation in the Immigration Court, a citizen of Guatemala receives a green card despite a conviciton for second degreee assault

Facts: In 2007, a citizen of Guatemala was placed in removal proceedings and he came to the firm for help in 2008.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm assisted our client’s wife in filing an I-130 petition petition on behalf of our client. Meanwhile, the Immigration Judge ordered deportation. After the I-130 was filed, the firm filed a motion to reopen in the Immigration Court, which was granted. Two years later, USCIS approved the I-130 petition. The firm then prosecuted our client’s adjustment of status in the Immigration Court. This was a tricky case because our client was convicted of second degree assault, with allegations of sexual assault. Even though our client was not convicted of sexual assault, the Immigration Judge has broad authority to consider any negative factors in the adjustment of status decision.

Outcome: On November 26, 2012, our client was granted adjustment of status, four years after the firm began the representation.

November 6, 2012 – Citizen of El Salvador receives CAT protection despite conviciton for “aggravated felony,” released after nearly two years of ICE detention

Facts: A citizen of El Salvador was placed in removal proceedings and charged as an “aggravated felon.” His family came to the firm for help.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm took our client’s case and discovered that our client had a viable claim under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The firm asserted that our client would be harmed by the violent street gangs in El Salvador if he was deported.

Outcome: Based on the firm’s extensive documentation and testimony from an expert, on August 15, 2012, the Immigration Judge granted our client CAT protection. The decision was appealed by ICE. The firm is continuing our client’s representation in the Board of Immigration Appeals.

On November 6, 2012, ICE withdrew its appeal in the Board of Immigration Appeals and released our client from ICE detention. He had been in ICE detention for nearly two years. Later that day, our client called the firm from his mom’s house to tell us how grateful he was for our help, then he sat down to his first home cooked meal in over two years.

October 25, 2012 – Citizen of Mexico receives cancellation of removal despite conviction for possession of cocaine

Facts: A citizen of Mexico was arrested at his home and placed in removal proceedings. His family came to the firm for help.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm took our client’s case and discovered that our client was eligible for LPR cancellation of removal by two months – our client barely had the seven years of physical presence necessary to qualify for cancellation of removal. Our client was subject to mandatory detention, but we fast-tracked his case in the Immigration Court.

Outcome: On October 25, 2012, our client was granted cancellation of removal. He was released from ICE custody the next day. The total time of his incarceration by ICE – from arrest to granting of relief – was less than two months.

September 17, 2012 – Citizen of Nigeria finally receives an I-130 petition from his U.S. citizen wife after eight years of trying

Facts: A citizen of Nigeria was placed in removal proceedings after his third I-130 petition had been revoked by USCIS. His first I-130 (filed nearly seven year earlier) had been denied and his second I-130 petition had been abandoned. In the process, the citizen of Nigeria had hired several immigration lawyers and had spent thousands of dollars. His fourth attorney had filed his fourth I-130 petition. Unsatisfied with his fourth lawyer, the citizen of Nigeria came to the form for help.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm supplemented the I-130 petition, prepped our clients for the marriage interview, and represented our clients at their USCIS interviews. USCIS was hesitant to make a decision, so the firm filed a complaint with the CIS Ombudsman and later we filed a mandamus in federal court.

Outcome: On September 17, 2012, about a month after we filed the mandamus action, our client was granted a family based I-130 petition. Subsequently, the firm got our client’s removal proceedings terminated and we filed a I-485 adjustment of status application with USCIS.

September 17, 2012 – Citizen of Jamaica receives CAT protection despite “aggravated felony” conviciton

Facts: A citizen of Jamaica was placed in removal proceedings and charged as an “aggravated felon.” His family came to the firm for help.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm took our client’s case and discovered that our client had a viable claim under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The firm asserted that our client would be harmed by transnational drug trafficking organizations in Jamaica if he was deported.

Outcome: Based on the firm’s extensive documentation and testimony from an expert, on September 17, 2012 the Immigration Judge granted our client CAT protection. The decision is being appealed by ICE. The firm is continuing our client’s representation in the Board of Immigration Appeals.

August 27, 2012 – Citizens of Korea have their removal proceedings terminated after lengthy court battle

Facts: A mother and her two sons, who are citizens of Korea, approached the firm with a very complicated immigration case. Prior to retaining the firm, five different immigration law firms had turned them down.

The Firm’s Representation: ICE alleged that our clients were deportable because the mother’s husband (and the sons’ father) had obtained a labor based immigrant visa by fraud, and thus our client’s were inadmissible when they adjusted status. The firm took the position that had our clients entered the United States with the fraudulent immigrant visa, they would have been inadmissible. However, our clients adjusted status and under Fourth Circuit case law, adjustment is not the same as admission, as that term is defined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

Outcome: After extensive briefing by both the firm and ICE, the Immigration Judge agreed with our position and terminated our client’s removal proceedings on June 20, 2012. Subsequently, ICE filed a motion to reopen the case three week later. The firm filed an opposition. Once, again the Immigration Judge agreed with the firm’s position and denied ICE’s motion to reopen on August 27, 2012.

July 27, 2012 – A citizen of Nigeria became a citizen of the United States despite a recent conviciton for disobeying a lawful order from a police officer

Facts: A citizen of Nigeria was convicted of disobeying a lawful order from a police officer. Later, he tried to naturalize, however his naturalization application was denied based on the conviction and he came to the firm for help.

The Firm’s Representation: The firm immediately filed an appeal of the naturalization denial – technically called a Request for a Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings under Section 336 of the Act. The firm asserted that despite the conviction during the statutory period, our client was still a person of good moral character and USCIS should approve his naturalization application. After the hearing, USCIS stalled on making a decision for another year. The firm filed a mandamus action in federal court demanding that USCIS make a decision on the naturalization application.

Outcome: Three weeks after the firm filed the mandamus action in federal court, USCIS scheduled our client for a naturalization swearing in ceremony. On July 27, 2012, our client became a proud citizen of the United States.

June 28, 2012 – Appeal of USCIS marriage fraud decision

Facts: A citizen of Ghana came to the United States and got married to a United States citizen. The citizen wife filed a I-130 relative petition on behalf of the Ghanaian non-citizen. At the marriage interview, the citizen wife had an emergency and could not attend the interview. USCIS issued a decision which said the I-130 was abandoned and slipped in a fraud allegation, but never offered an opportunity to rebut the fraud allegation. The non-citizen came to us for help.

The firm’s representation: The firm took our client’s case and immediately filed an appeal of the USCIS decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals. The firm believed that USCIS had violated our clients’ due process rights.

Case status: The appeal was filed on September 8, 2011. On June 28, 2012, as expected, the BIA denied the appeal, but recognized the fact that our client did not have an opportunity to rebut the derogatory information in the USCIS denial letters. Based on the appeal, our client was able to preserve his ability to file another I-130 petition at a later date.

June 1, 2012 – Coram Nobis relief granted in 12 year old shoplifting case

Facts: In 1998, a non-citizen defendant pled guilty to the Maryland crime of theft under $300. Even though the non-citizen received a probation before judgment, the crime could have supported a charge of deportation. The non-citizen was a green card holder and wanted to apply for citizenship. The non-citizen contacted the firm for help.

The firm’s representation: The firm reviewed our client’s criminal case and discovered that our client had not been represented by counsel and that her right to counsel had been violated. The firm filed a Petition for a Writ of Error Coram Nobis.

Outcome: On June 1, 2012, our client’s coram nobis was granted, and our client pled guilty to petty theft, which has little or no immigration consequences.